# Congress Is Right to Kill the OSHA Heat Rule

Published: 2026-07-28

### Highlights

- Congress voted to kill the Biden OSHA Heat Rule: On July 21, the House Education and Workforce Committee passed H.R. 6213, the Heat Workforce Standards Act, which would prohibit OSHA from finalizing the Biden-era heat standard or any substantially similar rule; a Senate companion bill sponsored by Sen. Bill Cassidy is pending before the HELP Committee.

- The rule was one-size-fits-all regulation at its worst: The Biden heat standard imposed identical paperwork and compliance requirements on a roofing crew in Tucson and an accounting firm in Ohio, with no consideration for climate, industry, or actual risk profile.

- A regulatory vacuum never existed: OSHA’s General Duty Clause already requires employers to protect against heat hazards, and states like California and Washington have their own rules in place — making the Biden mandate redundant, burdensome, and unnecessary.

The Biden administration’s proposed [OSHA Heat Standard](https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/08/30/2024-14824/heat-injury-and-illness-prevention-in-outdoor-and-indoor-work-settings) was always a solution in search of a problem, a sweeping federal mandate that would bury employers in red tape while doing little to improve workplace safety. Last week, Congress took a meaningful step toward stopping it for good.

On July 21, the House Committee on Education and the Workforce passed [H.R. 6213](https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/6213), the Heat Workforce Standards Act. The bill would prohibit OSHA from finalizing the Biden-era heat standard or any substantially similar rule. A companion measure, [S. 4427](https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/4427), sponsored by Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA) is pending before the Senate HELP Committee. Together, they represent a bipartisan recognition that Washington bureaucrats shouldn’t be micromanaging how every employer in America manages temperature in the workplace.

### What the Rule Would Have Done

The OSHA compliance burden landed the same way regardless of where a business operated. The Biden OSHA heat standard, [proposed in August 2024](https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/08/30/2024-14824/heat-injury-and-illness-prevention-in-outdoor-and-indoor-work-settings), required a written heat plan, a designated rest area, an acclimatization schedule for anyone new on the job, and this was required in the same manner to a roofing crew in Tucson as it would to an accounting firm with a warehouse annex in Ohio. The paperwork requirements didn’t take into account varied climate or industry.

The heat risk on an Arizona construction project is not the same as on a Minnesota farm. A rule written to cover both fits neither.

### Regulation in Search of a Problem

Here’s what gets left out when supporters of the rule call this bill an attack on worker safety: OSHA already requires employers to protect against heat. That’s the [General Duty Clause](https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/oshact/section5-duties), and it’s been on the books covering recognized workplace hazards since long before the Biden rule arose. In addition, there is a patchwork of state-level heat rules already in place in states like California and Washington. It is clear that there is not a regulatory vacuum waiting to be filled. We already have a system with real teeth.

[As the National Federation of Independent Businesses put it](https://www.nfib.com/news/press-release/nfib-supports-committee-passage-of-the-heat-workforce-standards-act/):

“Small businesses go to great lengths to ensure the safety of their employees, and a federal Heat Standard would only add unnecessary regulatory requirements that could force them to close or sell off to a larger competitor.”

### The Bottom Line

A citrus grove in central Florida and a steel plant outside Pittsburgh do not share a risk profile, a workforce, or a climate. The Biden administration’s rule was built on precisely that assumption: enforcing a single, uniform standard without any consideration for the specific realities of individual job sites. Congress voted to reject that premise last week, and it was the right call. [H.R. 6213](https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/6213) deserves passage in the House. [Cassidy’s companion bill](https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/4427) deserves a vote out of the Senate HELP Committee. And employers, most of whom already have heat safety plans built around their own conditions, deserve to keep running things that way.